Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BA Long-Haul Fleet Renewal - More Detail  
User currently offlineCrosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2598 posts, RR: 58
Posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 17205 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Just thought you may be interested in some more detail regarding British Airways long-haul fleet RFP which will appear in tomorrow's Flight International

Since the deadline for manufacturers to submit their proposals has passed, BA's commercial director, Robert Boyle, has gone on record with more details about what the airline is looking for.

Here's a quick summary;

Deal will be for 40-50 aircraft to replace;
20 B747-400s
14 B767-300s
plus 10 "bridging" aircraft to cover interim growth requirements.

For the bridging aircraft which will be delivered from 2009 onwards only the A330 and B777-200ER are in contention. BA has reserved 10 B777-200ER delivery positions for 2009, but these will only be firmed up if the B777/787 is selected for the main fleet renewal order. Likewise the A330 will only be ordered if the A350XWB is selected.

In contention for the main order are the A350XWB, B777-300ER, B787-9/10 for the twinjet requirement and the A380 or B747-8 to cover the large aircraft requirement. The A340-600 has already been discounted, as the A350XWB-1000 will cover BA's requirements for this category.

The article goes on to say that the 747 replacement order is extremely unlikely to be split between the A380/747-8, but that when the next round of 747 replacements is announced there may be room in the fleet for both types.

Lufthansa ordering 747-8 has improved the prospects for a BA order, as they were unwilling to be the launch-customer, but by the same token he concedes that while the A380 delays don't concern BA it does mean the airline thinks they'll get a better deal out of Airbus.

Hope there was something in there of interest!

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike Moores



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike Moores
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike Moores


Regards
CROSSWIND

85 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBillReid From Netherlands, joined Jun 2006, 1004 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 17029 times:

I suspect that BA will look equally at all options. The problem facing A is a logistics one.

Simply put the A380 cannot fly to a great deal of cities because the airport cannot handle them. In contrast the B748 would work. So unless they are willing to accept a mixed fleet from the start the A380 is not a good option.

On this basis everything else being equal I would expect a B order.



Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
User currently offlineLawnDart From United States of America, joined May 2005, 970 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 16877 times:

Quoting BillReid (Reply 1):
Simply put the A380 cannot fly to a great deal of cities because the airport cannot handle them.

The A380 is not meant to fly to a great deal of cities, but I'm pretty sure if the city provides the O&D for A380-type service, it will be able to handle the A380. Even cities like, where was it in Colombia? Medellin? Where they did some testing...a city like that will never see A380 service, but the airport could handle it.


User currently offlinePanAmOldDC8 From Barbados, joined Dec 2006, 960 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 16835 times:

Quoting LawnDart (Reply 2):
The A380 is not meant to fly to a great deal of cities, but I'm pretty sure if the city provides the O&D for A380-type service, it will be able to handle the A380. Even cities like, where was it in Colombia? Medellin? Where they did some testing...a city like that will never see A380 service, but the airport could handle it.

You need the pax to fill the aircraft other wise they will not use it to lose money



Barbados, CWC soon, can't wait
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6484 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 16781 times:

Quoting LawnDart (Reply 2):
Even cities like, where was it in Colombia? Medellin? Where they did some testing...a city like that will never see A380 service, but the airport could handle it.

It's one thing to be able to land an aircraft. Bringing it to the terminal is another thing entirely.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9002 posts, RR: 75
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 16728 times:

Quoting BillReid (Reply 1):
Simply put the A380 cannot fly to a great deal of cities because the airport cannot handle them. In contrast the B748 would work.

The 747-800 is not the same as the 747-400, it is in the same airport category as the A380, ICAO Category F.

No advantage for the 747-800 on that front, it actually needs more runway to takeoff and land than a A380.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineSwissy From Switzerland, joined Jan 2005, 1734 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 16707 times:

BA has enough destination which they could utilize the 380, perhaps a fleet of 10-14 to start with.....

Quoting BillReid (Reply 1):
I suspect that BA will look equally at all options.

Agree

Cheers,


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21505 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 16629 times:

I would expect that BA would get the 748 now, and the 388 in the future if they find they can support a 30% larger jet than their denser 744s. The 748 is incremental.

Eventually, I would guess BA could fly both, but as one of the top 747 operators, I can't see them replacing their whole 747 fleet with a larger jet. I expect 77W/748/380 split (and that includes replacing some 772 with 77W as well). Of course, the 350X-1000 can replace the 77W in this discussion, I just put the 77W in there because they already fly the 772 and the 77W is available 5 years sooner...

Quoting Zeke (Reply 5):
No advantage for the 747-800 on that front, it actually needs more runway to takeoff and land than a A380.

We won't know that until the 748 enters testing with final specs. Right now it hasn't been firmed up completely.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9002 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16515 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
We won't know that until the 748 enters testing with final specs. Right now it hasn't been firmed up completely.

We dont know down to the meter, we do know it is significantly more than the 380 due to its higher takeoff and landing speeds.

And as for now being able to offer "final specs......hasn't been firmed up completely", do you think this will be a factor ?

What did LH sign up for then if all Boeing have to offer is a paper aircraft that is "subject to change".



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineWingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2229 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16459 times:

I guess the same type of plane that Airbus has been selling for years, the 350. There are final spec details to firm up but I doubt it'll be anything like uncertainty over wings, engines, length, width, or construction material.

User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16348 times:

Quoting Wingman (Reply 9):
I guess the same type of plane that Airbus has been selling for years, the 350. There are final spec details to firm up but I doubt it'll be anything like uncertainty over wings, engines, length, width, or construction material.

Even if the 748 needs more runway than the A380, I dont think it would be a huge issue. But its fair to say that while it has not been frozen, the airlines have a VERY clear picture of its specs at this stage.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
Eventually, I would guess BA could fly both, but as one of the top 747 operators, I can't see them replacing their whole 747 fleet with a larger jet. I expect 77W/748/380 split (and that includes replacing some 772 with 77W as well). Of course, the 350X-1000 can replace the 77W in this discussion, I just put the 77W in there because they already fly the 772 and the 77W is available 5 years sooner...

Well in either case they will be replacing the 744s with a larger aircraft (748 is bigger!). If they are looking at the 773ER, than that is another spanner in the works as it is a new size in their fleet, likewise with the A350-1000. The whole 555 Vs 476 figures are not much use here, we must consider what configs BA are currently using, as many of their 744s have less than 300 seats. I remember reading that they are aiming to increase the number of Business and First class seats on the fleet.

[Edited 2006-12-29 19:13:43]

User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16315 times:

Quoting Crosswind (Thread starter):
BA has reserved 10 B777-200ER delivery positions for 2009, but these will only be firmed up if the B777/787 is selected for the main fleet renewal order.

AFAIK, the delivery slots that BA secured were for the 77W, not for the 772.


User currently offlineDavidT From Switzerland, joined Oct 2005, 477 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16294 times:

Is the BA terminal at JFK (7 isnt it?) A380-ready or would they have to remote stand / move terminal?

Are there any other major long-haul routes which BA would have to move terminal to handle the 380?


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9002 posts, RR: 75
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16294 times:

What ports to they operate 744s into ?


We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16243 times:

Quoting DavidT (Reply 12):
Is the BA terminal at JFK (7 isnt it?) A380-ready or would they have to remote stand / move terminal?

Are there any other major long-haul routes which BA would have to move terminal to handle the 380?


They are buying 40-50 aircraft to replace 34 aircraft.

Well if they are considering buying 15 or 20 A380s, They would put them on the densest what, 7 or 8 routes?

Im thinking JFK, LAX, SFO, HKG, Tokyo, and a few more.

[Edited 2006-12-29 19:24:17]

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21505 posts, RR: 60
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16202 times:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):
What did LH sign up for then if all Boeing have to offer is a paper aircraft that is "subject to change".

Yep, same as NH with the 7E7. Boeing provides them with minimum specs and performance assurances, but LH didn't buy a firm aircraft.

But LH did buy something valuable, the ability to influence the firming of the aircraft towards their needs. When LH says "we want this" and EK says "we want this" Boeing gives far more weight to LH. If BA signs up, we can expect that they and LH would have similar requirements for the 748i...

Quoting EI321 (Reply 10):
Well in either case they will be replacing the 744s with a larger aircraft (748 is bigger!).

No, they may not be.

If they replace 2 744s with one 77W/35X and one 748i, they are basically not increasing capacity at, and it gives them more flexibility in route planning, since they will have older 744s still in the fleet, so they can choose 77W/744/748i on any route.

And considering they are looking to 772ERs for growth, BA doesn't look like they want to grow by increasing plane size by 30%, but by adding frequency with a smaller jet. Just my take on it, but I think you'll see an all Boeing order this time. BA need the 77W in 2009, not the 35X in 2014, they need to replace the 767s (which the 358 is not best for), and they aren't in need of the A380 sized jet at this time, since they have so many LHR slots already...

At a later date, you can see an all Airbus order, with A380s and A320NGs.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineLawnDart From United States of America, joined May 2005, 970 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 16048 times:

Quoting PanAmOldDC8 (Reply 3):
You need the pax to fill the aircraft other wise they will not use it to lose money

My point...and since relatively few cities will be able to provide the pax, relatively few cities will be served by the A380.

Quoting N328KF (Reply 4):
It's one thing to be able to land an aircraft. Bringing it to the terminal is another thing entirely.

True, but if you can land the aircraft, then at least you've got the runway and taxiways to handle it...most of the cost of infrastructure is for the runway and taxiways.


User currently offlineGkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24926 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 15935 times:

Quoting BillReid (Reply 1):
The problem facing A is a logistics one.

The problem facing B, is that BA is a "British" carrier.


"British" = London fwiw



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4634 posts, RR: 23
Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 15821 times:

Quoting Gkirk (Reply 17):
The problem facing B, is that BA is a "British" carrier.

Explain what you mean because I have no idea...



I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
User currently offlineHumberside From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 4918 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 15796 times:

Quoting Crosswind (Thread starter):
plus 10 "bridging" aircraft to cover interim growth requirements.

I take BA are assuming they can either

Buy more slots at LHR
Cut their LHR short haul flights
The 3rd runway is built

Or they plan to expand long haul at LGW?



Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 15662 times:

Quoting Humberside (Reply 19):
The 3rd runway is built

Im sure it will happen sooner or later.

Quoting Gkirk (Reply 17):
Quoting BillReid (Reply 1):
The problem facing A is a logistics one.


The problem facing B, is that BA is a "British" carrier.

???? The BA fleet has always been mostly Boeings!

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 15):
BA need the 77W in 2009, not the 35X in 2014

Deliverys from 2009 will be bridging A/C - 772 or A330, a/c according to the thread starter, MAIN ORDER TO BE DELIVERED LATER:

Quoting Crosswind (Thread starter):
For the bridging aircraft which will be delivered from 2009 onwards only the A330 and B777-200ER are in contention.

.........What can we make of this? If the bridging a/c are to replace 763s, what can Boeing offer in 2009 as a replacent for a 763? Is the 772ER ideal to replace a 763, or would the A332 be better (remember it says only A330s or 772ERs)? If the bridging aircraft are to replace 744s from 2009, will there be 748 or A380 slots availible, and are the 772ER or A330 good bridging a/c for the 744? I dont think so! So it seems to me that these 10 bridging a/c will probably be only for the 767s, with the 744s to be replaced 'directly' after 2009, ie with no interm order.

[Edited 2006-12-29 21:07:55]

User currently offlineDrExotica From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 15340 times:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):
We dont know down to the meter, we do know it is significantly more than the 380 due to its higher takeoff and landing speeds.

OK...

How do you define 'significantly' in this context? 500m? 2500m? ...

Quantitatively, what is that takeoff roll for an A388 with std. full pax load (std. atmospheric conditions, etc. at sea level), and what is it for the 744? What are you guessing that it will be for the 748?



N707PA - Best looking commercial aircraft ever.
User currently offlineRaventom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 269 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 14442 times:

Quoting DrExotica (Reply 21):
How do you define 'significantly' in this context?

Significantly more than the 748? That is what 'significant' implies... like Zeke said "we don't know down to the meter".



I love the smell of burnt kerosene!!!!!!!!!!!!
User currently offlineBh4007 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 14237 times:

I thought that Boeing only offered the 777-200LR now ??

User currently offlineDrExotica From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 13899 times:

Quoting Raventom (Reply 22):
Significantly more than the 748? That is what 'significant' implies... like Zeke said "we don't know down to the meter".

Classic content free post.

Zeke obviously has a value in mind that he can share, or, is this more 'idle speculation'. Smart money is on the later.

How about within +/- 250m?



N707PA - Best looking commercial aircraft ever.
25 Ikramerica : Shout all you want, but it doesn't say that. It says those two types would start arriving in 2009, not that no other aircraft would arrive in 2009. L
26 3201 : They're not -- the "bridging" aircraft are for interim growth, a third category after "replace 20 744" and "replace 14 763." The 787/A350 will be to
27 Post contains links Behramjee : The B 772ER is a definite yes here due to the familiarity it already has with the BA fleet/maintainence crew/cabin crew so wipe out the A 332 from th
28 DrExotica : I'll do part of the homework - from the 744 Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning document, a 744 (with PW-4056 engines) on a standard day, 0'
29 Iowa744fan : Zeke, I may be off on a couple of these if they have since switched from 744s to 777s, but here it goes (eff. until Mar. 24th): From LHR: JFK, MIA, P
30 Gkirk : BA = London Airways, but I do hope they go for the 77L/77W/787
31 Keesje : Wiping out A330s from the bridging category proved moderately realistic in some 787 vs A350 competitions.
32 VV701 : On the current winter timetable LHR-BOS is flown three times daily. BA213 and 239 are 772 services but BA215 is flown by a 744. Similarly LHR-IAD is
33 Post contains images VV701 : Here are photos of G-CIVM about to depart from LGW on 27 May 04 as BA9178P after inaugurating the Pier 6 Bridge: I believe this was the last time a BA
34 ER757 : This is why I think the 748 has the inside track for this order. I do see A380's in the future however. As it stands now, if BA took A380's they'd ha
35 Elvis777 : Howdy Keesje, keeping the 330 in the bridging category might also prove to be wildly unrealistic in some 787 vs 350 competitions. I think that happene
36 Post contains links and images Keesje : Hi Elvis I think the price of the A330 is determined by demand & availability. The A330 is the most economic aircraft available today http://www.secu
37 Post contains links B2707SST : Per Boeing's 747-8 airport planning brochure, at sea level and ISA+15C, the -8 needs less runway at MTOW than the -400/400ER currently do: 747-400 @
38 Stitch : Kinda of surprised BA isn't looking at the 777-200LR, instead. Not for the range, but for the ability to take max payload out to around 7500nm... The
39 Jfk777 : BA will take 2 or 3 more years to make up its mind about the A380. The 777 will play a bigger part in BA's future, 773ER's will join the fleet. The 74
40 Post contains images Elvis777 : Hi Keesje, Thanks for your kind response. Your statement needs to be qualified. In certain situations the 330 is the most economical. The same can be
41 Beech19 : No, at Boeing you can purchase any of the "current generation" of an aircraft. Even though all the already ordered 772 and 773 have been delivered yo
42 KC135TopBoom : According to the performance data that B released for the B-747-800I/F, and the same data A released for the A-380-800, the B-747 needs less runway.
43 LTU932 : Is that with or without the steep approach option Boeing is offering on the 747-8, which was supposed to lower approach speeds?
44 PM : Fascinating. I always thought that many A.Netters were being premature in assuming these would be 777-300ERs. The announcement (whenever it was) just
45 United Airline : I suppose they will order the B 787-9/10 to replace the B 767s and the B 747-8 to replace the B 747-400. Maybe a few A 380s.
46 Stitch : Anyone know if SQ floated an RFP for their near-term 772ER replacement to Boeing or did they just default to the A333? If Boeing was part of an RFP,
47 Dank : If I read the OP correctly, the near-term replacement is dependent on the long term replacement. If they decide to go the 350 route, then it will be
48 KC135TopBoom : That number is for all the different versions Airbus offered before they settled on the XWB, or Mk. VI version. I wonder if airlines like US can now
49 MD-90 : That's true, since the A380's wing area is much larger, but the 748 can fit into smaller gate areas and requires less ramp space than the A380. That'
50 N328KF : Actually, the 737-900 is no longer on offer. Existing orders will be filled, but the -900ER is the only variant of that size you can acquire. (Basica
51 Zeke : From flight international - "Ground roll and time to lift-off, as recorded by the flight test engineer Fernando Alonso, were 1,345m and 37s respectiv
52 Post contains links Eureka : I can tell you that the 747-8 will be slower than 160 kts on approach. I seem to remember half joking threats if the approach speed of the configurat
53 Eureka : Zeke, I apologize. I see I scrolled through the thread too quickly. You were actually the one who accurately quoted from the airport planning document
54 Kaitak744 : If you reserve a 777 slot, it can be for any 777. Same with 737, 787, ect. BA is the least affected by LHR restrictions. But they simply can't cut th
55 Scorpy : BA have also in the recent past acquired additional slots (e.g. from UA) so like all LHR carriers this is an option for them if they need more.
56 Post contains links and images Zeke : These are the airports that plan to be A380 ready by 2011 A 748 would not help then, any airport that can handle a 748 can handle a 380. From a recen
57 Experimental : BA 744 - BKK BOM BOS CPT DEL EZE GRU HKG IAD ISB JFK JNB LAX LHR LOS MEX MIA MRU NRT ORD PHX SEA SFO SIN SYD YVR YYZ Only LHR-SIN-SYD got downgraded
58 Post contains links and images Ivo : Nice aircraft !!!! Modified Airliner Photos: Design © EDINEY Template © THIERRY DEUTSCH Modified Airliner Photos:Design © EdineyTemplate © David C
59 Zvezda : No, Zeke's numbers are not idle speculation. Airbus and Boeing have both published preliminary figures. However, the B747-8I SuperJumbo will be able
60 Post contains links Zeke : This is clearly incorrect. The 744 is ICAO Cat E, the 748 ICAO Cat F, same as the A380 Superjumbo. Less that 50 airports of the 220 airports I am awa
61 Zvezda : No, that is incorrect. As I wrote before:
62 Zeke : Which is also clearly incorrect, EK for example operate 777s with over 400 seats without a problem. Many operators have over 400 seats in their 747s.
63 Zvezda : Whether the number is 400, 410, or 420 is immaterial. I will concede the point to Zeke IF no carrier will ever install more seats in a WhaleJet than
64 Myt332 : Well UPS won't.
65 Zeke : Considering that some 744s now have 550+ seats in them, that is very possible.
66 Scorpy : As much as I expect BA to go with a boeing order for this one, I do believe that most of the places they would want to fly the great white whale would
67 Joni : How many airports need modifications to handle an A380? And how many of the ones that do need mods need more than can be done in 2 months? FWIW, Hels
68 Post contains images Keesje : About BA & the A330. They could put in a lot of seats & cargo and cover the most important part of their network at lower CASM cost then have ever had
69 Zvezda : I'll concede that the WhaleJet can probably operate at every airport that regularly sees 550+ seat Jumbos.
70 Zeke : Thanks for the list, the airports that BA operate to that will be ready for the A380 Superjumbo and 747-8 Intercontinental by 2011. BKK - YES BOM -YE
71 Crosswind : If BA order the A380 they will not be forced to downgrade any B747-400 flights - this order is only to replace the 20 oldest B747-400s. BA's total fl
72 Post contains images Zvezda : It's a relief to see that at least someone else understands this. The A.nutters who think that the B777-300ER will still be winning orders ten years
73 Post contains images Stitch : Yes, I could imagine the 777-300ER will no longer be selling come January 2018, since it will be in the same position the 747-400 is now - squeezed o
74 Scorpy : I would have thought it will probably be much sooner than that that its sales start to taper off significantly.
75 Zvezda : I think we're already beginning to see the start of the tapering off. I think the last B777-300ER sale will be well before 2018. Perhaps about 2010 o
76 Stitch : Well the 744 still sold two years into the "A388 era", so I'd agree that around 2012 or so would probably be the "cut off date" for sales, depending o
77 Ikramerica : Zeke, enough of this. Your Airbus bias is showing, and frankly, it makes you look foolish. ICAO Categories are one thing, but that doesn't mean the t
78 Kaitak744 : Another argument on BA: A380 vs 748..... There are only 6 A380 gates at LHR T5. Now, if the A380 was to replace the 747-400 one on one, that would be
79 Post contains images Zvezda : That can't possibly be correct because Zeke proved otherwise: Ikramerica obviously must be wrong too, because he also contradicts Zeke: Let's all adm
80 Post contains images EI321 : I misinterpreted the thread starter, my bad. (Barman): Sorry mate, youve had enough! Its fine to dissagree, but this kind of stuff should be left in
81 Zeke : It is not a false claim. I would never taxi an aircraft into a gate where I have an object, be it a baggage cart, or the wing tip of another aircraft
82 EI321 : I dont think anybody is suggesting that BA could, shoud or would replace the 744 fleet (57 aircraft) on a 1:1 basis with A380's. IF BA were to order
83 Zvezda : Remember, according to Zeke if a WhaleJet can't use the gate, then a B747-8I SuperJumbo can't either. It doesn't matter whether there is room or not.
84 Zeke : According to the BAA T5 Fact Sheet That is just T5, other gates are now A380 ready.
85 Srbmod : Since some of you insist on turning this into an Airbus v. Boeing flamefest thread, it is now locked.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
British Airways Clarifies Long-haul Fleet Renewal posted Wed Mar 15 2006 06:31:32 by Jacobin777
BA Long Haul Fleet-Reveiwing Options posted Tue Jul 19 2005 15:49:29 by DAYflyer
BA's Long-haul Fleet posted Fri Jul 23 1999 06:36:23 by Gnomon
BA's Long-Haul 763 Fleet Question posted Sun May 30 2004 18:46:00 by AA777
No More BA Long Haul Flights At LGW posted Sun Nov 26 2000 11:00:29 by OO-VEG
BA Long Haul Deliveries For 2008/09? posted Tue Oct 17 2006 17:27:10 by BALAX
CX's New Seats On The Entire Long Haul Fleet? posted Tue Oct 17 2006 14:11:37 by United Airline
Why No Leather Seats For BA Long Haul? posted Wed Sep 6 2006 19:23:42 by 8herveg
BMI's Long Haul Fleet - What Aircraft, What Route? posted Sun Aug 20 2006 16:18:09 by Gilesdavies
Royal Jordanian Nears Long-Haul Fleet Decision posted Thu Jun 8 2006 08:10:28 by Leelaw